TikTok is a bad math goldmine! Solving x+2=x-2. Reddit r/sciencememes

Learn how to correctly solve the equation x+2=x-2. Subscribe to ‪@bprpmathbasics‬ for more algebra tutorials.
Original post on Reddit: / qjsr7xycd4
-----------------------------
I help students master the basics of math. You can show your support and help me create even better content by becoming a patron on Patreon 👉 / blackpenredpen . Every bit of support means the world to me and motivates me to keep bringing you the best math lessons! Thank you!
-----------------------------
#math #algebra #mathbasics

[@bprpmathbasics]

1 divided by 0 (a 3rd grade teacher & principal both got it wrong) kzbin.info/www/bejne/jXrCooN4hs19ia8

[@ToguMrewuku]

You wasted your time with this video.

[@appoh100]

If you apply limits and assume x is going to negative or positive infinity you get an answer.

[@Real-Name..Maqavoy]

*Reddit* isn't any better.

[@Real-Name..Maqavoy]

@@ToguMrewuku Hi #bot

[@Rando2101]

​@@Real-Name..Maqavoy at least reddit has downvotes and a place for math, so people know if they're wrong

[@tommysmith5479]

Let's be honest, you can already see just by looking at the question that this will have no solution...

[@bprpmathbasics]

Yes, I can.

[@devooko]

This stupid comment has more likes than the comment below this, which has actual valuable information unlike this junk

[@BenfengWang]

(X+4) does not equal x

[@Verxinn]

Who came up with it was for sure just writing down random numbers, the statement "a number plus two is equal itself minus two" is a paradox

[@fzlagges5849]

​@@devookoWell not exactly that because it is still working out something, you can just read it and say no soln exists, because the statement essentially says that find x such that increasing x by 2 is the same as decreasing x by 2, which is not possible. So no solution.

[@kh6853]

"x+2=x-2" "No it doesn't"

[@sayarimamani3605]

Nuh uh

[@khaitomretro]

"Time of day" + 12 hours = "Time of day" - 12 hours

[@kebien6020]

​@@khaitomretro you missed a (mod 24) at the end

[@MariaNicolae]

​@@kebien6020 "x+2 = x-2... in ℤ₄; I'm fine!"

[@marvalice3455]

​@@khaitomretro no. That cannot be used to solve this problem.

[@Coyote_5.0]

Guy had the mental prowess to apply difference between two squares, but not enough to do the first step right💀💀

[@MattMcIrvin]

That's how you can tell that this is almost certainly someone yanking our chain. Most of the algebra is just to distract attention from the blatantly ridiculous first step.

[@Shizuna560]

Bros probably solve the 1st line, then ask chatgpt to solve the rest 💀

[@cybore213]

What he is showing first is the solution from the TikTok video. Then he proceeds to show how it is wrong.

[@pegasoltaeclair0611]

@@cybore213 OC wasn't talking about bprp

[@cybore213]

@pegasoltaeclair0611 Thanks. Sometimes it's hard to figure out who the comment refers to. But I should have figured out that the OP was referring to the guy who posted the TikTok answer.

[@leftylizard9085]

Computer Scientist: "x = x+1" Mathematician: "Nuh uh"

[@anjhindul]

Computer science square root of -1... because computers don't work without "I"

[@user-vs1mn8ig8w]

well its an assignment operator, not checking for equal. Checkng for equal is ==.

[@f-86zoomer37]

@@user-vs1mn8ig8wwoosh

[@3RR0RNULL]

@@user-vs1mn8ig8wThat’s part of the joke bro

[@asandax6]

That's becausewe don't have proper notation for iterable variables. In computers x = x + 1 means. (new/next x) = (current/previous x) + 1

[@Cas-Se78.97]

-Remembers the negative square root -Forgets division exists

[@kraquinette2430]

-remembers the negative square root -doesnt realise a number minus two would never be equal to the same number plus two

[@bobbobert9379]

​@@kraquinette2430 unless the numbers are mod 4. Then x=2 would satisfy it.

[@Llortnerof]

@@bobbobert9379 Sure, but then you'd expect that to be explicitly mentioned.

[@Viki13]

My eyes are bleeding from the proposed solution

[@fireblazenotbulgaria3053]

I mean they literally could’ve just checked it, there is no way 2+2 = 2-2 (if you use sqrt4 which idk why they didn’t even simplify it down to just 2 but I digress)

[@irokosalei5133]

There's nothing wrong with the way they've written it because √ is always positive.

[@error_6o6]

I think the thing is that -2+2=2-2.

[@Viki13]

​@@error_6o6but you're saying x=-2=2

[@thge07]

Quadratics can have multiple solutions, x=2, x=-2 indicates that x could be either, and not that it is both

[@ExplosiveBrohoof]

I hate how the first step is (x+2)(x-2)=0, which immediately implies x=±2, and then the TikTokker goes on to undo that and expand the quadratic out so that they can solve it by taking square roots instead. That almost bothers me more than the fact that the first step is completely bogus.

[@weareprobablyinanarguement]

The average tiktokers knowledge of math:

[@upisntdownsilly]

it’s probably a 12 year old who was just really eager to use the new identity he learnt

[@weareprobablyinanarguement]

@LumiaFenrir-nn2pz and you’d be surprised by the number of Asian fetuses that know how to solve quadratic equations in microseconds

[@user-uz4vr7to8c]

but it doesn't even imply x = +-2. When you say "x = +-2" that means x is either 2 on both sides of the equality, or -2 on both sides of the equality. You can't mix that precisely because it's an equality. When you solve a quadratic formula you also end up with "all x in the formula are either x1 or x2", but you never have one x being x1 and another being x2 at the same time.

[@ExplosiveBrohoof]

@@user-uz4vr7to8c Not sure what you mean by "on both sides of the equality" here. x is only on one side of the equality. When I said "x=±2", I was shorthanding, "either x=2 or x=-2."

[@wdjigaming2200]

This is not math this is meth

[@jensraab2902]

😂

[@Mike_B-137]

I was looking for comment like this. I got micro aneurysm just by looking at it: x+2=x-2 ==> (x+2)(x-2)=0, followed by second step. Yea maybe in some imaginary cosmos where law of mathematics and physics don't exist created by TikTok's influencers.

[@jbertucci]

Meth is herd

[@HelloHamburger]

​@@Mike_B-137 TikTok managed to combine additive and multiplicative rules together. Because if you divided one side to the other, the other side would be one. If you multiplied, it would be (x-2)(x+2) but the other side would be (x+2)^2. Not 0. Also, if you subtract the one side, you would get zero, but, the other side would = 4. Which, that is one way to find no solutions just like subtracting just the x on both sides. The problem is they multipled on the left side, but, subtracted everything on the right. And broke Algebra rules. So, they applied multiplication to the left side and then assumed the right side would cancel to 0. Remembering some of Algebra but forgot you have to subtract. And then after that incredibly wrong step, it just gets stranger and more wrong. Lol. Gosh. I think the comment may possibly be a troll. Lol. To mess with TikTok, but, not 100%. Could be someone overconfident in their Math abilities. Either way, they seem to have just kept working until they found a solution somehow. And each step seems reasonable to someone untrained in Math, but, to someone who is trained in Math, it is obviously wrong and insane each step of the way to a misshapen "solution".

[@victorcadillogutierrez7282]

I saw some tiktok coders through other platforms and it was down bad, but this is too much, how come as a society we need to explain x+a = x-a if a /= 0 is wrong. System has failed.

[@RolinhelMiranda]

That proposed solution is got to be a ragebait ,

[@blacklight683]

How did you do that?

[@spongebubbly]

@@blacklight683 there is no sol.

[@wobaguk]

The fact that he had zero on the right, not 1 implies he was mixing up subtracting with multiplication, not division.

[@Kyrelel]

No, he simply copied what tiktok gave as the answer and then explained why it is complete bullcrap. The tiktok was a joke, literally.

[@Terraspark4941]

@@Kyrelel talking about the commenter, not the guy explaining

[@kirigayakazuto7401]

@@KyrelelWe say “Once TikTok was launched, parents’ nurture f**ked up” (It’s Chinese, I try to translate it, but it still mean TikTok mess up everything)

[@pollo_frito22]

I'm acting like that wouldn't happen to me, but it happened even on tests (the worst part is that I'm a physics undergrad 😅)

[@lilypad429]

I have a solution, change = to ≠ 😅

[@ABHISHEKKUMAR-01024]

Surely, The equation x + 2 = x - 2 should be replaced with x + 2 ≠ x - 2

[@wqrw]

another solution is changing = to > x+2=x-2 (false) x+2>x-2 (true)

[@divisix024]

Another solution, the equation is in Z/2Z

[@peternewseterforever]

I love this comment. 😂

[@abhirupkundu2778]

​@@wqrwtrue dat.

[@soumyanandan1567]

The question goes like: I love Math = I hate Math

[@HelloHamburger]

It's a love-hate relationship

[@TheRealSecrets-3p1k]

I love Math = I love Math

[@metaparalysis3441]

Not simplifying into 2 is probably intentional so that people won't just mentally check their solution and find out how garbage it is.

[@UnfairDare]

Bro got a degree in psychology but failed math 💀

[@Бобреккакойта]

Ахуеть, я только что узнал, что у слова "фигня" есть английский аналог.

[@alluseri]

​@@Бобреккакойтане пиши сюда больше никогда

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Lol yea most people just nope out seeing square roots even though this one is quite simple. But that means they won't catch how the answer doesn't even work if you plug them in which is checking your work 101

[@dvxv4016]

​@@Бобреккакойта garbage - мусор

[@xanderlastname3281]

Hes getting stronger. He can manipulate the board by sinply tapping it with the back of his marker. We must stop him before its too late

[@bprpmathbasics]

😂

[@Bearylover]

One day he shall no longer have a need for markers, his mind is enough

[@casusbelli9225]

The real answer is not in finding x. The real answer is that this addition is defined over ring of remainders of division by 4. In which 2 = -2 since 2+2 = 0. Therefore, the equation is true for any x. We are threading in the realms of abstract algebra, where everything is possible.

[@Abenteuerlich77]

Lmao! 😂😅

[@Alex-gg9ht]

He edited it out

[@johnathanpatrick6118]

It's really unnecessary to do anything past subtracting x on both sides, you got 2 = -2, a likewise always false statement like 0 = -4. What I wanna know is how somebody thought dividing (correction: multiplying) both sides by x - 2 would give 0 on the right side. 🤣🤣🤦🏾‍♂🤦🏾‍♂

[@mizapf]

Even worse, this was obviously multiplying both sides with (x-2).

[@Kualinar]

That was not dividing both sides. That was multiplying the left side by (x-2) while SUBTRACTING (x-2) from the right side to give that zero. What was done as the first step is this : (x+2) = (x-2) → (x+2)*(x-2) = (x-2) - (x-2) → (x+2)(x-2) = 0

[@Tristanlj-555]

@@KualinarNono, it was just dividing both sides by 1/(x-2). I don’t know what composition rules they’re working under where that equals 0 on the right hand side, but technically it was dividing both sides by 1/… just as much as it was multiplying by (x-2)

[@Kualinar]

@@Tristanlj-555 Dividing can never reduce a value to zero. ONLY a subtraction can do that. Then, a division by (x-2) would have made the left side into THIS : (x+2)/(x-2) NOT (x+2)*(x-2)

[@Tristanlj-555]

@@Kualinar I know that. I just finished my last exam, complex analysis for my first year of mathematics at Uni. I alluded to that jokingly by mentioning composition rules.

[@artemis_furrson]

This is why you should always plug your solution into the original equation to make sure it's correct.

[@jacobisbell9388]

You'll run into a problem here, the solution they got is x = 2 or -2. If you plug in -2 on the left and 2 on the right it technically works. Obviously you're supposed to do the same number for both x values but we're past the point of them doing the right thing.

[@artemis_furrson]

@@jacobisbell9388 Yeah to be fair that makes sense.

[@Tealen]

​@@jacobisbell9388yea but even just looking at the equation, how would x plus n be equal to x minus n. no calculations needed.

[@Pingwn]

​@@Tealen Unless n is 0, which it is not.

[@Tealen]

@@Pingwn yes, in this case its 2. I should have mentioned it

[@spoddie]

I love the tap erase. Super tech white board ;)

[@bprpmathbasics]

Thanks!!

[@bprpmathbasics]

I got it from Amazon haha

[@JoaoMartinsdeOliveira-jk2nt]

​@@adityagoyal7110 0-2=-2 0+2=2 -2=2 So no, its not correct

[@aryantripathi3766]

​@@adityagoyal7110 aah yes 0 - 2 = 0+2 which would imply or -2 = 2

[@TheDeathLove]

​@@adityagoyal7110 Since when adding or subtracting to 0 gives back 0? Are you implying 0 is infinite?

[@error_6o6]

0:16 I’m sorry but exactly WHERE did that come from

[@28BeEks]

Meth

[@mycommentmyopinion]

Fr, I can't even follow the thought process, i'm so confused

[@inferno38]

It was revealed to me in a dream

[@Trap-chan750]

Isn't it supossed to be x+2=x-2 x-x=2+2 0x=4 meaning it has no solution?

[@RoadToLegend2023]

​@@Trap-chan750 little mistake, you forgot the - on the first two, meaning 0x = 0

[@Kualinar]

The very FIRST step of the proposed «solution» is totally wrong. There are NO solution as this define two parallel lines.

[@TheTransforcer]

Yea I’m no calculus major, but I know enough about (X)’s to put all X’s on one side and everything else that you can on the other. And that gets 0X=-4, which is about as wonky as the first question.

[@tundcwe123]

I am sure that if you would stop at 0X=-4, someone would say X = -4/0

[@xanderlastname3281]

​@@tundcwe123i mean now that you mention it..... infinity + 2 = infinity - 2. That is if you consider dividing by zero to equal infinity, and not undefined

[@Artleksandr]

​@@xanderlastname3281infinity is not a number. Can't work with it like that outside of a limit or other special conditions.

[@xanderlastname3281]

@@Artleksandr ok but it's a concept If you have infinitely many things (natural numbers), and you simply append 2 numbers (0 and -1) you still have infinitely many numbers Cardinality hasn't changed If you them subsequently remove -1 and 0, you still have infinitely many numbers Sure it's not a "number number" like 5 or 87, but the concept still works Adding or removing finite elements from an infinite set does not change the cardinality of the set nor the number of elements

[@egg5145]

Using Tiktok is already a signal for the lack of common sense

[@lomarix]

The first step is basically "forget about the equation and let's just solve another one" 😂

[@AerialiteOre]

the solution to this problem is the friends we made along the way

[@RedShiftedDollar]

The graph also helps. It’s y=x graphed with two different offsets. Intuitively they are parallel and will never cross.

[@theaureliasys6362]

Something drilled into me in school: when dividing by a variable or an expression containing a variable, mind the 0. And, if it is an inequality, mind your negative numbers.

[@saturday1257]

visually you can take both the x+2 and the x-2 as functions, which is the idea of solving ecuations, you are checking when is it that y1=x+2 intersects with y2=x-2, which you would check intersections by doing y1=y2 and if you graph it, you would see that since there is no intersection, there is no solution. Probably someone already said it but i wanted to say it too :D

[@_JoeVer]

you can just plot the (x+2)/(x-2) hyperbole and the asymtotes are obvi x=2 and y=1, so it will only (almost) converge at both positive and negative infinity.

[@CyberCyrus313]

The two statements have the same slope (1) if you look at them as a function of x, but have different y-intercepts (2 and -2). So they are parallel on the same plane, thus never intersect. If you solve you get 0=4 or 0=-4.

[@UlmDoesAnything]

This is why i had a high school teacher who said he doesn't like calling it bringing to the other side because it causes confusion like that You need to be doing the same thing on both sides, so he emphasizes that point in the equality so none of us do such a bjg mistake

[@rezwhap]

My teacher also hated ‘cancel’ for the same reason. There’s no need to invoke any magic!

[@soacespacestation8556]

​@@rezwhapDoes that also apply to Twitter?

[@reddeadlycreeper]

The guy didn’t even check his solutions back by plugging them in That’s rule #1 for anything you want to know you’re reasonably correct on

[@bobbun9630]

I'm sure if the original presenter of this problem and solution had done the check, he would have plugged in the negative value that he obtained on the left side, the positive value on the right, and shown that indeed his solutions work!

[@alexjoel1602]

x+2=x-2 x=x-4 x/x=x/x-4/x 1=1-4/x 0=-4/x x=-4/0 x=unsigned infinity Now let's see if solution correct. unsigned infinity + 2 = unsigned infinity - 2 unsigned infinity = unsigned infinity Any real number added to unsigned infinity doesn't change it. Solution is correct.

[@YuriyNasretdinov]

Plus or minus infinity also works as a solution btw

[@Tom_TP]

Just in case this isn't a meme, infinity isn't a number. You can never have x equals infinity, only x aproaches infinity or lim x = inf. There's a reason why R = (-inf, inf) and not [-inf, inf]

[@_qwerty_3545]

I love how literally every step they take is incorrect in some way

[@be7256]

I mean only the first step really is

[@netanelkomm5636]

I hate people who are bad at math, and think they are good at it. Even worse - people who know SOME math and do wrong things on PURPOSE and then brag about it just to get FREAKING COMMENTS OF PEOPLE WHO GET MAD AT THEM BUT DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT

[@pocpic]

My favorite subgenre of this is when there are multiple fundamental errors, but the result happens to be correct.

[@MrMousley]

Before I watch your video I'm going to say NO SOLUTION. How can there be ?

[@rorydaulton6858]

To be precise, there is no solution in the real numbers or the complex numbers. But there are solutions in other number systems. For example, both the affine extended real number system and the projective real number system has a value infinity, denoted ∞ (or perhaps +∞ in the affine system). We have ∞+2 = ∞-2 = ∞ so ∞ is a solution. I'm sure there are other solutions in other number systems. Perhaps infinite cardinal numbers?

[@liamernst9626]

Integers mod 2 has infinite solutions :)

[@rorydaulton6858]

@@liamernst9626 That is an *excellent* answer! I wish I had thought of it. Of course, modulo 4 also works and has the advantage that "2" is still called 2 in that system.

[@vdm942]

​@@rorydaulton6858🤔 this is essentially a question of whether two parallel lines can intersect at one point

[@rizzwan-42069]

​@@vdm942no

[@BossDropbear]

​@@vdm942 Agreed.

[@WombatMan64]

I immediately saw both equations as straight lines with gradient 1 and intercept 2 and -2 (y=mx+c). So two parallel straight lines; therefore no solution. Playing with the equation -> x+2 = x-2 Subtract (x-2) from both sides -> x-x+2+2 = 0 -> 4 = 0, which is categorically false so the original equation can't exist. Now to watch and see what bprp does.

[@AnonymousMycologist]

My calc teacher in high school was known for saying "your calculus would be fine if your algebra wasn't horrible horrible"

[@whoff59]

The first line is actually saying +2 = -2 as you can subtract x on both sides. That's it.

[@kurumi-san8363]

The fact that in his mind he found a way to pass to the other side the x-2 as a multiplication is crazy 💀

[@Imposter7777]

Lol I can really relate your sadness at 1:51

[@ethanodell8044]

This honestly feels like something I would genuinely mess up with at some point because I tend to overcomplicate everything with math

[@aMartianSpy]

2:41 divide by x-2 😊

[@MoeLester78u1c]

x-2=x+2. x-x=4. x(1-1)=4. x(0)=4. x=4/0. x=∞

[@christopherg2347]

1:10 Gesture erasing? Nice feature 😂

[@Noctosphere]

When you screw the very first step up, you screw up the entire process...

[@davidgillies620]

In complex numbers, |x - 2| = |x + 2| is fairly obviously just any purely imaginary number i.e. Re(x) = 0. But that's the only way to get anything even approximating a solution.

[@Misteramen]

On the worst case scenario, if this was a variable question, it's still (probably) unsolvable because we weren't even explicitly told what X is supposed to be...

[@SystemAlchemist]

This is wrong. x is obviously {0, 1} in Z_2 (mod 2). Or 2 in Z_4.

[@jamesstephenbritton9723]

You can't just multiply one side by (x-2) and not the other side.

[@FocusLRHAP]

x+2=x-2 -> No solution x+2=-x-2 -> Solution = -2 ^ |

[@Muslim16572]

I'm so used to getting math wrong that even when I find that the equation has no solution I just don't believe it and start over.

[@markgraham2312]

You are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO right! TikTok should be banned!!

[@Banana_Split_Cream_Buns]

At first I thought "that's impossible". And then I thought "it's been over 20 years since I have done this stuff, I must be wrong and therefore an idiot." I was not wrong but I am still an idiot.

[@AizenSosukesama]

I will be born tomorrow and i solved this,how could tiktokers not

[@mrdrsir2324]

Happy birthday

[@masterbeta4480]

I genuinely didn’t see any issues about the tik tok solution at first, but then I saw the question

[@maxk6856]

The ans is infinity

[@echoi23]

Or negative infinity -♾️

[@looseleaf7367]

Because he spent so much time going through everything I had an existential crisis where I KNEW that the equation was impossible, and was actively dreading that he was actually going to show a solution that worked somehow and turn my world upside down.

[@darcash1738]

We have: x = x + 4 Now substitute x into x: x = (x + 4) + 4 x = x + 8 x = x + 16 … And similarly this can be done by first subtracting 2 over, ie, x = x - 4 The only way adding these finite quantities can work without affecting anything is if x is +/- ♾️

[@rehanthegreat-d5x]

"i think the question is wrong" "wait lemme hear this explaination" "yes im right"

[@عبداللهديب-ب6و]

Can you teach me how can I sove this problem, please? sqr(a)+sqr(ab)+sqr(abc)=12 sqr(b)+sqr(bc)+sqr(abc)=21 sqr(c)+sqr(ac)+sqr(abc)=30 Find: (a^2 + b^2 + c^2)

[@CARNAGE25]

Tried but couldn’t solve it. I’d love a video on this problem

[@Sqrt.Infinity]

(a^2 + b^2 + c^2) is below the first three equations and on the right side of 'Find:'. Thanks me later.

[@jensraab2902]

There's probably a better approach but you could solve it by brute force. I suggest substituting √a, √b and √c by u, v, and w just to get rid of the square roots. You'll then get this system of equations: u + uv + uvw = 12 v + vw + uvw = 21 w + uw + uvw = 30 Three equations with three variables should yield solutions. Then, plug the solutions into the last term. (Just remember that it will have to be u⁴ + v⁴ + w⁴.) I had WolframAlpha do the work for me. There are three sets of solutions. the sum of squares that we are supposed to find can be either 2433, 10002, or 312688557441/384160000. Like I said, maybe there's a better way but the old-fashioned way should work. If I had to do it by hand, I'd start by subtracting the second from the first equation: u + uv - v - vw = -9 We can isolate u by factoring it out and bringing the other stuff on the right hand side: u (1+v) - (v+vw) = -9 u = (v+vw+9) / (v+1)

[@popularmisconception1]

it took me some time and I must have made a mistake in my regular scholarly attempts, but then it jumped at me: it works for a = 1, b = 1, c = 100, so your result is 10002. method: first substitution for those ugly sqrts: A = sqrt(a), B = sqrt(b), C = sqrt(c), so you get A + AB + ABC = 12 B + BC + ABC = 21 C + AC + ABC = 30 now you see every next equation is 9 bigger, so it is as if you subtract 1 and add 10. and this really works if A = 1, B = 1, C = 10 so you get 1 + 1 + 10 = 12 1 + 10 + 10 = 21 10 + 10 + 10 = 30 A^4 + B^4 + C^4 = 1 + 1 + 10000 = 10002

[@عبداللهديب-ب6و]

@@popularmisconception1 Thank you, I liked your idea, but you found the answer by guessing.. Can we solve it by mathematical steps?

[@MarIsRandom]

“the input is a contradiction: it has no solutions”

[@aukword6255]

Actually, allowing for sufficient inaccuracy, x=infinity. As x 》infinity Then (infinity+2)/(infinity-2) 》1

[@vasiliynkudryavtsev]

Exactly. And -infinity as well.

[@aukword6255]

​@@vasiliynkudryavtsev True. Well spotted. 😊

[@treeNash]

Tis not how infinity works

[@aukword6255]

@@treeNash Ah, yes, and neither is it how infinity DOESN'T work.🙃

[@angelasophia2325]

yeah its simple…i learned this in year 8th, like i dont know why the reddit comment got it wrong…I try it and i did this x+2=x-2 x-x=-2-2 i grabbed all the x to the left side and numbers on the right side but changed the symbol 0= -4 so no solution

[@thbb1]

One solution (over the space of functions, not the reals nor the complex numbers) is that x is a periodic function of period 4, such as sin(pi x/2).

[@subii_0]

x+2=x-2 x+4=x (x+4)+2=x-2 x+6=x-2 (x+4)+6=x-2 x+10=x-2 You can keep subbing in x=x+4 forever, so basically x+∞=x-2 ∞=-2

[@dannyyeung8237]

Solutions are x=+infinity or x=-infinity

[@Ninja20704]

@@dannyyeung8237 infinity is not a number so you cannot even say x=inf. you can only say something like x approaches infinity, never equal

[@lukandrate9866]

What? Your second step is wrong, Mr. TikTok

[@craftcrewtv8094]

that's an interesting approach, too bad infinity is not actually a number

[@tverdyznaqs]

I gave it a go myself and also arrived at 0=-4 but assumed I must've done it wrong and that there must be some clever solution that I couldn't see......

[@Brid727]

dawg why did bro do subtraction but multiplication 😭

[@GideonHannsz-ht3qm]

That tiktok solution is theblitwral definition of "well yes but actually no"

[@Religion0]

Oh. I was thinking it's been too long since I've done algebra, because i couldn't see a solution that made sense.

[@KonstantinOrekhov]

I think for dummies geometric proof is best for understanding. "Two parallel lines will never cross each other"

[@retropixels873]

Funny how people always assume that a problem must have a solution.

[@Gabi-nn6xu]

the way that i learned is that you need to get all the common elements together as much as you, and the trick is that you pass to the other side and invert the operation, i think this way is easier to understand for a lot of people and there's no way to mistake. So like, x + 2 = x - 2, i think positive x + (positive) 2 = positive x - (negative) 2 this way you think pass positive 2 to the other side, it becomes negative 2, so x = x - 2 - 2 then you pass the x too, and invert the operation, so you get x - x = -4

[@Frydragor]

I appreciate your commitment to making a short video with the perfect duration. You da best!

[@tervalas]

I mean, it simply makes sense. You cannot subtract and add to the same number and get the same result.

[@MasterQuestMaster]

1:25 I clicked on this video to find out which mental gymnastics were even used to go from the first line to the second line. Like for real.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Ngl, the screenshot tricked me for a second because I focused on looking at the reply but didn't look back up at what he was solving. So it seemed to make sense until I looked back up and went "wait a minute"

[@jensraab2902]

What I find fascinating (in a bad, can't-look-away-from-the-car-crash kind of way) is that this person knows how to handle the difference of two squares and even square roots but makes such a basic mistake. I feel sorry for this person because if they have this kind of deficiency in fundamental matters they're bound to constantly run into problems in their math class which must be extremely frustrating and demotivating. I hope their teacher realizes this and helps the student (to find help) to understand the basics properly.

[@dominicballinger6536]

For anyone who may wonder "What would happen if you had x+2/x-2 = 1 and tried to graph them? Would there be no intersect?" Actually, no since there'd be a horizontal asymptote as x approaches infinity and negative infinity, so they wont ever cross.

[@TheJaguar1983]

I was thinking of perhaps having to go complex or something like that, but glad to know that "no solution" was actually the right answer, because I couldn't see it working in the complex plane either.

[@flameofthephoenix8395]

1:52 Alternatively we can pretend those weren't steps towards solving the problem but rather just a bunch of unrelated equations he was writing for fun. The answer he gave was also unrelated.

[@Grafyte]

my favorite way to solve a system of equations is desmos graphing, and I could tell quickly those are two parallel lines which means no solution.

[@Steve-YT383]

I knew the TikTok answer was wrong first look. Didn't trust myself on no solution though. Glad to see that was the answer though!

[@Andrew..J]

The real solution was the friends we made along the way

[@gm2723]

I didn't see the part at the start where he took this as someone elses work and was thinking "that's not how math works what's wrong with this guy? . . . Oh nothing"

[@A207.]

The realization that he came back full circle was hilarious

[@joshlewis8860]

I knew it couldn’t be solved, but watched the whole video just to remember how it was written 😂 “No solution”

[@mercuriete]

When you plot those lines they never intersect because they are parallel. So having that in mind you know already there won't be any solution. Thats why is very important visualize in your mind the equations first to then plan how to attack the problem.

[@chachopaul695]

“Find where two parallel lines meet.”

[@esrohm6460]

thank you for telling me i'm not dumb. i had to think really hard and couldn't solve it and was afraid i am missing something super simple. but what i wonder is now can you solve this using imaginary numbers. why would you, because why wouldn't you

[@Dyurx]

Bro had that much of confidence to say "Easyyyy"

[@GameJam230]

I don't know what upsets me more- the fact that the original poster assumed moving the X-2 to the other side would require multiplication by X+2 instead of subtracting from it, or the fact that they EVEN DEFAULTED TO IT OVER DIVISION

[@gnommg]

I think this is the first time ever I got one of these right.

[@vibeslide]

My problem as a mathematic dummy is that I will forever recall the wrong solution but immediately forget the correct one.

[@wolftamerwolfcorp7465]

Confused myself for a bit since I looked at the work and it checked out, then saw the original problem and realized what the issue was

[@enigma0876]

Never ask for advice or answers from tiktok.

[@ar1i_k]

X = infinity

[@DarthAlphaTheGreat]

First step is already “WHAT?!”

[@qwertyazerty6563]

Bro did not cook with that one

[@sonicwaveinfinitymiddwelle8555]

"x+2=x-2" "Nuh uh"

[@IsYitzach]

The dividing thing shows that in the limit of x to infinity, you get 1 on both sides. So infinity I guess?